The Sunday Mail
Women & Leadership
Maggie Mzumara
At the end of a difficult year, such as this one, the need to reflect on and gauge how well one’s leadership approach has served them cannot be overemphasised.
With the new year — one threatening to be equally challenging — looming, there is a need to adjust, or readjust as necessary, leadership approaches to ensure enhanced performance.
Every year, there should be evidence of growth, otherwise the accumulating years and experience will all count for nothing.
How well we lead can and will make a difference on what kind of year we will have in 2021, as we usher our teams, organisations, departments through whatever the year will throw at us.
It is, therefore, instructive to remind one another the leadership styles that we can consider, adopt, encourage, avoid and combine. Being aware of the pros and cons of the various leadership approaches can place leaders in good stead for the new year.
Such introspection and review is of considerable importance for any leader.
The following are leadership approaches as presented by author, Anna Marie Valerio, in her book “Developing Women Leaders A Guide for Men and Women in Organisations”.
Visionary
Through this approach, the leader gains team members’ or employees’ support by expressing responsibilities in the context of the organisation’s overall direction and strategy. It makes goals clearer, increases employee or members commitment, and energises a team. It is most effective when a new vision or direction is needed or when the manager is perceived as an expert.
It is least effective when the manager is not perceived as credible or when trying to promote self-managed work teams.
Directive
This style was formerly referred to as autocratic and entails command — and — control behaviour that at times becomes coercive. It is most effective in crises, but it eventually stifles creativity and initiative.
Over the long term, it can lead to rebellion or passive resistance by employees.
Affiliative
Leaders using this style emphasise maintaining relationships between and with employees, and their emotional needs over the job.
It is most effective in getting diverse groups of individuals to work together harmoniously and when used in combination with visionary, participative, or coaching styles. It is least effective in crises or complex situations needing clear direction and control or when corrective performance feedback is necessary for employees’ improvement.
Participative
This style is collaborative and democratic.
Leaders using this style engage others, build consensus, and foster teamwork and participation in others.
It is most effective when employees have at least as much information and knowledge as the manager.
It is least effective in crises or when employees are incompetent or lack crucial information.
Pacesetting
This style involves leading by example — “setting the pace” — and personal heroics.
Leaders using this style have high standards and tend to do much of the work themselves. Over time, this can discourage employees and can lead to the leader’s burnout. It is most effective when quick results are required.
It is least effective when employees need direction and development.
Coaching
Leaders using this style are concerned with the long-term professional development and mentoring of employees.
This style is appropriate in most managerial situations and should be part of any leader’s repertoire.
It is most effective when employees are motivated to take initiative and seek professional development.
It is least effective in crises or when the manager lacks expertise.
Maggie Mzumara is a leadership, communication and media strategist as well as corporate trainer, who offers group trainings as well as one on one coaching in various areas of expertise. She advocates women leadership and is founder of Success in Stilettos (SiS) Seminar Series, a leadership development platform for women. Contact her on [email protected] or follow on Twitter @magsmzumara.
